AMIT KUMAR TIWARI, vs SMT. SONAM TIWARI, — FA(MAT)/193/2026

Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 02nd June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: CGHC010215462026

Filing Number

FA(MAT)/12395/2026

Filing Date

29-May-2026

Registration No

FA(MAT)/193/2026

Registration Date

30-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru

Coram

Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru

Bench Type

Division Bench

Category

FAMILY LAW MATTERS ( 15 )

Sub-Category

CHILD CUSTODY MATTERS. ( 1504 )

Judicial Branch

Civil Section

Decision Date

02-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 04-Jun-2026

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.AMIT KUMAR TIWARI,

    Adv. Surya Kawalkar Dangi,Saurabh Dangi,Saurabh Dangi, ,PRIYANKA BAJPAI,SHIMPI AGRAWAL,ARYAN MISHRA,AISHWARY PRASAD,Saurabh Dangi

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SMT. SONAM TIWARI,

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 02-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice,Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta GuruView PDF

    Case Summary: FA(MAT) /193/2026 - Amit Kumar Tiwari v. Smt. Sonam Tiwari The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the father's appeal challenging the Family Court's interim order denying him custody of their minor autistic daughter (born 2015) while permitting only weekly video calls. The High Court found no perversity or illegality in the Family Court's discretionary decision, which appropriately considered the child's age, medical condition (Autism Spectrum Disorder), and special needs at the interlocutory stage. The court held that disputed factual questions must await evidence and final adjudication before conclusive determination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 02-Jun-2026

    Fresh Matters

    Hon'ble The Chief Justice , Hon'ble Shri Justice Bibhu Datta Guru

  4. 29-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. FA(MAT)/193/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: FA(MAT) /193/2026 - Amit Kumar Tiwari v. Smt. Sonam Tiwari The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed the father's appeal challenging the Family Court's interim order denying him custody of their minor autistic daughter (born 2015) while permitting only weekly video calls. The High Court found no perversity or illegality in the Family Court's discretionary decision, which appropriately considered the child's age, medical condition (Autism Spectrum Disorder), and special needs at the interlocutory stage. The court held that disputed factual questions must await evidence and final adjudication before conclusive determination. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case